Both sides met yesterday afternoon with Superior Court Judge Richard Strauss and agreed to cancel the hearing about keeping the agreement confidential. It will now be made public, possibly as early as Monday, when the Coronado City Council will meet in closed session to consider approving the settlement.

The two-week civil trial came to an abrupt end Wednesday, the day Foley was set to testify. He sued Coronado after being followed and shot by police Officer Aaron Mansker two years ago.

Foley's injuries ended his football career. He sought unspecified damages, contending that Mansker acted contrary to his training and violated Coronado police policy.

After jurors were dismissed, attorneys for Coronado and Foley requested a court hearing Monday to keep the agreement sealed. Neither side explained yesterday why it dropped the request.

Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, a nonprofit group that works to advance open-government rights, said the city should immediately make the agreement public after approving it.

“They don't have any legal basis for withholding it,” Scheer said. “My guess is that they didn't know that until they tried to seal it, and they became aware of the legal authority that makes it very, very difficult if not impossible to maintain it as a secret agreement, and now they're correcting their mistake.”

City officials wouldn't comment yesterday on the attempt to seal the agreement. One council member didn't return a phone call for comment. Four who were reached referred all questions to city attorneys.

“We have an official spokesman, and that is our city attorney,” Councilman Al Ovrum said. “I have been advised that we have one meeting left to go. I don't want to be in a position of saying something that would affect anything.”

Coronado is self-insured for liability claims up to $100,000, and it participates in an insurance program with other county municipalities and agencies for liability purposes.

The pool buys excess insurance that pays for claims valued at more than $2 million. Other cities and agencies could be affected by the Foley agreement because the claim could reduce the reserve pool for future settlements.

Coronado residents interviewed yesterday about the settlement said they want to know how their tax dollars are being spent. Last month, Coronado approved a general-fund budget of $36.7 million for fiscal 2008-09, which began Tuesday. The city has general-fund reserves of $38.9 million.

If insurance doesn't cover the entire settlement, the city could have to pay out of the general fund or reserves.

“I'd like to know what (the settlement) is, because we're probably going to have to pay for it,” said Ted Braaten, 86, an 18-year resident of Coronado.

Braaten said he would prefer that “police just patrol Coronado and not get involved in other cases like that.”

Others said Foley deserved the settlement and that Mansker, who remains employed with the Coronado Police Department, had overstepped his authority.

“I feel that Foley has the right to every dime he gets,” said John Bonnett, 34, a 30-year Coronado resident.

As for why the settlement should be made public, Scheer said California courts have ruled in two important cases, including one in San Diego County, that governments can't conceal the information.

“They stand for the proposition that you can't have a secret settlement under the Public Records Act,” Scheer said. “You can sign one, you can promise you can keep it secret, you can intend to keep it secret, but the law says you can't.”

In a 1984 decision, the state 4th District Court of Appeal ruled that a settlement between Orange County and a convicted child molester who alleged that his throat was slashed by a fellow inmate at the county jail had to be made public.

In a 1998 case brought by The Copley Press Inc., parent company of The San Diego Union-Tribune,  the appeals court ruled that sealed court records involving a settlement between the insurance company for the Poway Unified School District and a 15-year-old student who was sexually assaulted must be made public.

Scheer said the ruling in the Copley case was especially significant because it involved records that a lower court had sealed.

Even though the case involved a minor, “the Court of Appeals says, 'Sorry, no, you can't seal that,' ” Scheer said.

Despite state rules adopted to discourage sealed settlement agreements, National City in 2002 kept secret for seven months a $750,000 settlement of a sex-discrimination lawsuit filed by a former female police officer. It was made public after the Union-Tribune  filed a request under the state's Public Records Act.

Staff writers Ray Huard and Dana Littlefield and library researcher Erin Hobbs contributed to this report.

Janine Zuniga: (619) 498-6636; janine.zuniga@uniontrib.com